With less noise around, news has more meaning

NEW YORK - FEBRUARY 14:  The New York Times he...

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

After three weeks without television news, with limited Internet access, with our daily dose of information neatly packaged in the spare and succinct International Herald Tribune, read leisurely at a French sidewalk cafe, I find it jarring to return to the noise that often passes for American news.

In the Sunday New York Times, Peter Baker put it this way:

This is what passes for political discourse in Washington these days. Someone in a position of authority, or at least celebrity, says something modestly interesting and someone on the other side – or sometimes even the same side – blows it up into something resembling a full-fledged contretemps. It’s politics by slip of the tongue.

This at a time when the issues confronting Washington could hardly be more consequential. Yet explaining the new financial regulation bill that passed last week or the new health care program slowly coming into effect is complicated compared to the media catnip of a good partisan fight.

In politics and political news, it seems, this country has reduced itself to a world of finger-pointing, of bitterness, of scoring points and of playing gotcha.  Analyzing is out. Bashing is big. Who needs to stop and think when everyone, it seems, has the answer:  That it’s someone else’s fault.

In France, I loved reading about the World Cup and Tour de France, about Britain’s apology for Bloody Sunday and France’s debate over head scarves in schools, about U.S. command struggles in Afghanistan and the ways technology is changing the brain. I learned things. I engaged as I relaxed. I read things that provoked lively conversations with Kathy.

It is this engagement in contemporary events and issues that drew me to the news business three-and-a-half decades ago.  The chance to inform. To keep the conceited and powerful accountable. To know first what people soon would be talking about and, perhaps, to help them order those thoughts.

The newsroom of the San Jose Mercury News had plenty of pace when I arrived there as an enterprise editor in 1987. I worked for the smaller, leaner, less reverent afternoon, or p.m., paper.  We had edition deadlines at 7:30 a.m., 10:30, 11:30 and then 1 p.m., a pace fast enough to leave me burdened with splints on my arms for repetitive stress injuries after less than half a year.

Yet even then, time remained for thought, for reflection, for planning, for follow-up.  News wasn’t only what was happening that instant, but what came next, how the story should be followed the next day and, on big stories, for days to come.

I believed, as I was taught in the early 1970s at the University of Missouri, that the best newsrooms not only covered the news but uncovered it, that they took important stories and explored all of the “angles” they presented so that readers might recognize their importance and, sometimes, clamor for change.

I still believe this. But though this world of news hasn’t disappeared (a Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times series on cell phones and driving comes to mind, as does the best coverage of the BP spill), it has long been in retreat.  We post and repost updates by the minute — 9:42, 9:48, 9:57 — as if each missed tick of the clock somehow will deprive the world of knowledge.  We definitively explain the why of a story before we really have a clue of the what.  And truly major stories — domestic spying, for example — lose traction and interest, it seems, even before the ink on the page has dried.

No, not only the flight of ads has diminished the printed world of news. The hunger for anything written by anyone online has done so as well.  And even at the most respected news outlets, we measure quality not in content but in “hits.”  (The Christian Science Monitor, The Times reports today,  sends a daily message to staff listing the number of page views of every article and many top newspapers list their “Top 10.”)

Too often in such a “news” environment, pandering to readers rules the day.

I should hasten to add here that I’m not an elitist. I love to blog. I like the authenticity of the blogger’s voice. I’m guilty of sharing my own half-baked thoughts.  But I have no illusion that blogging can or will replace real news — reported deeply, placed in context, analyzed by those who have devoted 50 hours a week for years to gaining expertise in a subject or field.

Democracy needs that kind of news. But when its best purveyors themselves are overwhelmed by the buzz of the hour and minute, when the dis of the day becomes the discussion of the Sunday Week in Review, I can only wonder what else I’m missing.

I hope, as I re-immerse myself in American culture after our brief respite, I can remember what the French have built one of the world’s most genteel cultures around: The notion that less offers more, that life — and news — don’t depend on how much you do or how much you absorb, but how deeply and how well.


About jerrylanson

I teach, write, coach and sing, though you're not required to listen to the latter. I'm a journalism professor at Emerson College in Boston. My third book, "Writing for Others, Writing for Ourselves," was published in November by Rowman & Littlefield Publishing. You can read a sample chapter at www.jerrylanson.com. My passions are politics (generally liberal in outlook), music, mountains, golden retrievers and my grandchildren, though not in that order. Please stop by and mix it up with me. I always answer those who post.
This entry was posted in media coverage, news and speed and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to With less noise around, news has more meaning

  1. Caitlin Kelly says:

    Here’s a daring idea — don’t re-immerse yourself. Go on a media diet. I have been reading the NYT here and there on-line (14 days in Canada right now) and reading the local papers. Meh.

    I am so damn glad to NOT hear more blablablablablablabla about the oil spill or the recession, with nothing new to say on any level. I am loving reading fiction, taking photos, talking to strangers in bars and on the beach. That’s my kind of news for now. I can honestly say I am not missing my usual 3 papers/day.

    • Jerry Lanson says:

      Lovely Caitlin. I’m so glad you’re taking the same kind of break. And for now at least, we’re continuing our “media diet.” Visiting our grandson in Baltimore. Starting each day with a walk before eggs fry on the sidewalks (it’s hot). Then repairing to a coffee shop near Betsy with just one paper (The Times) and sipping coffee for 90 minutes or so. Similar, in short, to our routine on vacation. Trying to stay slow. Enjoy the rest of that visit to Canada!

  2. If the news today were actually NEWS, then it wouldn’t be so much background racket. Unfortunately, the media caters to what its viewers say they want. Or so it says. I find it hard to believe though, that the majority of people -really- want to sit glued to the boob tube watching certain celebrities report to the court room for their silly little jail sentences. Then again, I could be part of a gross minority who prefer their consumption of news to be intelligent and worth the little time they have in the day to spend on it. Thank Bob for internet searches and customized feeds!

    • Jerry Lanson says:

      I’d respond but I’m monitoring my 20-feed multiplex for more news on Lindsay’s jail sentence. … Seriously, thanks for stopping by.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s